his Margent thus expresseth himself in the Place cited Of this we have a considerable Evidence lately offered to the World in the Examination of a Priest so imploied at the Council Table A. D. 1567. being the Ninth of Queen Elizabeth which is Published from the Lord Burleigh's Papers which were in the Hands of the Archbishop Vsher and from him came to Sir Iames Ware whose Son brought them into England and lately caused them to be Printed To prove this he quotes no more valuable Author then Foxes and Firebrands 1680. So that to the Author of that Reverend Pamphlet Foxes and Firebrands we must go and if he proves Romantick all this Story is spoiled The Author of that Pamphlet hath this Story Pag. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. Too long for any to transcribe I shall only make some Remarks upon it sufficient to make it appear ridiculous enough 1. He tells us it was a Story which happened 1567. Ninth Elizabeth And p. 14. he saith It produced the Act for preventing Popery and other Sects which injoined all People from Ten Years old and upward not having a lawful Impediment to repair every Sunday to hear Divine Service under the Penalty of forfeiting Twelve Pence for every such default Whereas First There was never any such Act as took Notice of Persons Ten Years Old Secondly For the Twelve Penny Act it concerns none under Sixteen Years of Age and was made first Elizabeth which was Eight Years before surely the Worthy Author read first Elizabeth decimo Elizabeth was not this think we a very judicious Author fit to have his Word taken How this falshood could escape the Eyes of the Learned Dean that thought fit to give such a Paltry Pamplet Credit I cannot but admire but we shall find more than this to defame this Romance by 2. He tells us the Story was transmitted being an extract out of the Memorials of my Lord Burleigh to Bishop Vsher from his Papers to Sir Iames Ware from him to Robert Ware Esquire his Son So then here are Papers which in their Original are pretended to be but Extracts by we know not whom these Extracts are 116 Years Old wrote in Paper never that we heard of discovered by Bishop Vsher all his Life Time but coming none knows how or when to Sir Iames Ware who is not said to be the Bishops Executor neither did Sir Iames communicate them but Dies At length 't is pretended one Mr. Robert Ware his Son hath obliged the World not by Publishing them himself but by communicating them to the Author of Foxes and Firebrands in whose Hands Papers of that Nature whatever they got were like to loose nothing thus the World comes to be blessed with them and I presume this Story deserves just as much Credit as the Catholick Letter Published a little after this the Forgery of which was detected by Parliament and the Author cried Peccavi for it Surely if we were not very partial in our Judgments upon Relations and Stories that favour our own Opinions and Fancies it were hardly possible any Learned Man could call this a considerable Evidence which hath nothing of an Evidence in it Here is a Paper Evidence that is but a pretended Abstract and that of a Relation of Matter of Fact more than a hundred Years Old it were worth something to see it and this communicated to the World after I know not how many Descents My Lord Burleighs the Primates Sir Iames Ware and at last at the Second Hand not by him that had this Relick but by one who hath not given the World much Cause to be confident of the Truth of what he hath wrote And as it will appear by what followeth hath no more deserved any Credit from the World for this Story which will appear if not a Romance yet to have such Marks of one as any one upon an Hue and Cry would see Reason to stop it upon Suspicion as such 3. In the first Place he saith Faithful Commin was a Friar of the Order of St. Dominick This encouraged the Dean of Pauls to call him a Priest and our Casuist to call him a Dominican Frier but how doth this appear from any Part of the Story as related at large in the Pamphlet He confessed no such thing all that he said was that he was of Christs Order a Preacher of the Holy Gospel No such thing was proved against him Clerkson the Arch-Bishops Chaplain saith he fell from the Church of Rome and puts him to prove his Ordination objects that he never came to our Liturgy nor received the Sacrament from any of our Orthodox Clergy-men Draper the Cook and his Maid witnessed nothing but their hearing of him Pray two Hours in his Private Chamber Neither doth Baker the Ship-master prove any such thing he only tells the Council of a Story that one Martin Daval should tell him of which this was no Part. Possibly he had been a Dominican Frier but that he was so now appeareth from nothing in the whole Story and there is no doubt but in the Ninth of Elizabeth there were some hundreds of Dominican Friers that were Protestants for it was but Nine Years after the generality of the Nation had been Papists So as all that should have been said if so much could was that this Faithful Commin who formerly had been a Dominican Frier was accused by Iohn Clerkson Chaplain to Archbishop Parker Nicholas Draper and Mary Dean a Maid Servant 4. They Deposed as is said upon their Oath What That the said Faithful Commin was no true Protestant but a false Impostor a Sower of Sedition among Her Majesties Loyal Subjects This is a pretty Strange Oath as if one should go and depose before a Justice of the Peace that A. B. is no Honest-man but a Thief a Murtherer c. I wonder what Judge or Justice of Peace would Convent any upon such an Oath Yet we are made believe not very probably that upon this he was Convented Munday April 5. before the Queen and the Council where Archbishop Parker examined him I hope upon his Examination something will appear further 5 The Archbishop as is said asked him Of what Profession he was He replieth Of Christs Order The Archbishop asks him What Order was that He replieth A Preacher of the Holy Gospel The Archbishop asks him What Gospel he call'd the Holy Gospel He replies The Gospel of Iesus Christ. The Archbishop asks Vnder what Porrer do you own to bold that Gospel He replieth Vnder Christ and his Saints The Archbishop asks Do you acknowledge any other Power save that of Christ to be on the Earth He replies Yes I do Archbishop saith What is that He replies The Holy Catholick Church The Archbishop saith Do you not acknowledge a Defender of the Holy Catholick Faith He replieth God is the only Defender Then the Archbishop tells the Queen he was instructed or else was a Man of Craft I would now gladly know what
Advertisement THere is lately Published A Letter of Advice to the Churches of the Nonconformists in the English Nation Endeavouring their Satisfaction in that Point Who are the True Church of England And now in the Press Short Animadversions upon Dr. Calamy's Discourse in the Conformists Cases against Dissenters concerning a scrupulous Conscience An Examination of Dr. Hascard's Discourse concerning Satisfaction wherein it is inquired How well the Author of the said Discourse hath proved That it is not lawful for a Man to go from his Parish Church to Meetings that he might better Edifie AN ANSWER TO Dr. SCOT's CASES AGAINST Dissenters CONCERNING Forms of Prayer AND The Fallacy of the Story of Commin plainly Discovered LONDON Printed for A. Baldwin at the Oxford-Arms in Warwick-Lane 1700. AN ANSWER TO Dr. SCOT's CASES of CONSCIENCE ABOUT Forms of Prayer IN the Question relating to Forms of Prayer agitated of late Years betwixt Learned Divines of several Perswasions Three Things are considerable which are no light Prejudices against their Opinion who have been so Zealous for them 1. The Difficulty of bringing them to State the Question right or to speak closely to it when so stated 1. Whether Forms of Prayer be lawful yea or no 2. Whether supposing them lawful they may be lawfully imposed on Ministers of the Gospel 3. Whether supposing they may be lawfully imposed on by some they may be lawfully imposed universally on all Ministers and by all Ministers used in their Publick Ministration 4. Whether People may join with Ministers using them Are Four distinct Questions The first of which is that I know of denied by none The last by none or very few The Author of the Book called A Reasonable Account why some pious Nonconforming Ministers in England Iudge it sinful for them to perform their Ministerial Acts in Publick solemn Prayer by the prescribed Forms of others Chap. 1. Stated the Question thus Whether it be lawful for Ministers having the Gift of Prayer ordinarily to perform their Ministerial Acts in Solemn Stated Publick Prayer by reading or reciting Forms of Prayer composed by other Men confessedly not divinely and immediately inspired although by Superiours required so to do His Learned Answerer confesseth That he had Stated the Question with sufficient plainness and clearness Let that then be taken for the true Question for we are concerned in no other 2. A Second considerable Prejudice is That those who have pleaded the lawfulness of the Vse of Forms have laid a great deal of more stress upon the inartificial Arguments drawn from Authority and Antiquity as they have pretended than upon any artificial Arguments drawn from the intrinsick Nature of the Action whereas one Scriptural or Artificial Argument is worth a Thousand others and till the lawfulness of an Action be proved no Argument from Authority commanding or Antiquity or present Usage approving can come into any Consideration at all it being most certain that no Authority of Man can oblige us contrary to the Will of God neither ought any Examples of Men to be produced as Temptations to move us to any Thing of that Nature 3. A Third is Their extravagant Zeal to load the Opinions contrary to theirs with odious Prejudices and Imputations Three of these I have taken more special Notice of in this Case 1. The First is great Impertinence and Nonsense and Rudeness to say no worse that are sometimes mingled with extempore Prayers so our Casuist phraseth it Part 2. pag. 14. 2. The Possibility that fluency of Expression may be from Diabolical Inspiration P. 2. pag 13. This our Casuist also hits upon I do not remember any higher Authority for this than that of Ravilliac Redivivus Since the Notion mightily pleased Dr. Falkner in his Vindication of Liturgies p. 41. Ravilliac produced only the Instance of Major Weier to prove what he said our Casuist hath found more 3. The Third is That these conceived Prayers were first brought in by Iesuits This also our Casuist hits upon P. 2. pa. 59 60. For the First of these I do not think it worth the while to say any Thing to it the Knowledge of the contrary to so many Thousands in London for Twenty Years together whiles hardly any others were publickly used and the Experience of Two or Three and Twenty Years since whiles the Forms have been used in Publick Temples yet others also have been used in the hearing of many Thousands is so eminent a Confutation of this as nothing need be added to say nothing of what hath been already said that Forms for the Desk will not prevent this unless we have some for the Pulpit and that for Sermons as well as Prayers and for Families c. and that as large an Experience hath shewed that a wandring Mind in a Minister will expose Forms to the like Absurdity of which Instances enough might be given besides that it is no small Imputation upon those who are intrusted to send out faithful and able Preachers that they send out such as cannot Pray without Impertinency Nonsense and Rudeness or Worse But the two latter have in them so much of falshood if not something much worse that it is necessary to vindicate free conceived Prayer from such black and odious Imputations fit for nothing but to make some prophane Persons matter for Discourse over a Pot of Ale or Pint of Wine I will begin with the latter first P. 59. Part 2. as to which our Casuist faith P. 59. Par. 2. That we should do well to consider who it was that first introduced it that is praying by conceived Prayer into England and set it up in Opposition to our Liturgy For First There was one faithful Commin a Dominican Frier who in the Ninth of Elizabeth to seduce the People from the Church thereby to serve the Ends of Popery began to Pray Ex tempore with such wonderful Zeal and Fervor that he deluded a great many simple People for which he was afterwards amply Rewarded by the Pope Vid. Foxes and Firebrands p. 7. P. 17. After him one Thomas Heath a Iesuit pursued the same Method exclaiming against our Liturgy and crying up Spiritual or Ex tempore Prayers thereby to divide the People from our Publick Worship telling the Bishop of Rochester by whom he was examined That he had been Six Years in England labouring to refine the Protestants and to take off all Smacks of Ceremonies and to make the Church purer †Of which see more in the Preface of the learned Treatise The unreasonableness of Separation beginning p. 11. And I hope when our Brethren have well considered who it is they join with and whose Cause they advance while they thus decry our Liturgy and Cry up their own Ex tempore Prayers in the Room of it they will at last see Cause to retract a mistake which none but the Church of Rome will have cause to thank them for The Learned Author quoted by our Casuist in
God if it be according to the Revealed Will of God Surely one who being about to pray hath any thing brought into his Mind to confess beg or give Thanks for which he knows is according to the Revealed Will of God his Duty to confess beg or give Thanks for may know or at least reasonably think it is brought to his Thoughts by the Holy Spirit of God tho' he cannot confirm it to be so by a miraculous Operation But saith our Casuist tho' the Scripture may be sufficient to discover the Matter of the Inspiration whether it be true or false yet it is not sufficient to distinguish the Inspiration whether it be Divine or Natural or Diabolical Then he runs into a Discourse of Natural and Diabolical Enthusiasms and concludes That Men may be inspired naturally or from the Devil and how dangerous it is to father such Inspirations upon the Spirit of God 1. For natural Inspiration it is a kind of unintelligible Thing for surely he that is inspired doth aliquid pati suffer something and to suffer it to receive the Action of a foreign Agent So that to speak modestly tho' Natural Inspiration be a Canting Term devised by some of late for no very good Purpose it is no very good Natural Sense carrying with it contradictionem in adjecto which is not very Scholastick It is true a Man may have a natural or accidental Fervency of Spirit occasioned several natural and honest ways as well as by some less honest and I do not think it much dishonourable to the Holy Spirit to make use of those natural Means to excite the Affections Our Casuist is aware that this Third Reason of his will have the same if not a greater Force against that Assistance of the Spirit in Prayer which he and others of his Mind are willing to allow that he might not be called the Spirit of Supplication for nothing viz. in exciting and inflaming the Affections whose Fervour cannot be denied also to proceed sometimes from the Temper of the Body and they will be at a Loss there also to distinguish betwixt the Fervour that is Divine and that which is Natural in its Causation But how will he avoid it He tells us p. 12. That as to this we have a sure Word of Promise but not for the latter and therefore if we can claim a Promise we have just Reason to conclude that how much soever other Causes might contribute towards it the Holy Spirit was the Principal Cause I hope my Reader from what I have said before will see Reason to conclude that we may as well claim Promises and more than one for that Influence which we claim for the Holy Spirit upon our Words in Prayer as for the Influence it hath upon our Affections and if he will but name us the Texts and Promises he hath for the Spirit 's Influence upon our Affections it is ten to one but we shall prove that those very Texts if Rom. 8. 15 26. Gal. 4. 6. as much concern Words and contain Promises for Assistance as to Words as the exciting of Affections and we are pretty sure of it considering the great Influence raised Affections have upon our Words expressive of them so as we are Even and if there need no Miracle to prove the one to be Divine neither doth there need any to prove the other Influence Divine also 2. As to Diabolical Inspiration we have spoken before The Probability of such a thing is a very bold Suggestion We cannot deny but the Devil may sometimes suggest Scriptures to us ' He did so to our Saviour Matth. 4. 6. But it is a sure Rule that he never doth it but for obvious and apparently sinful Ends. If a Minister or a consciencious Christian be conscious to himself that he hath no other Ends in Prayer than to glorifie God in obeying his Will to humble his Soul before God for his Sins and to beg and obtain his Pardon and such Influences of Grace as his Soul stands in need of and he finds Scriptures pertinent to these Things brought to his Mind he hath no Reason but to conclude they come from the Holy Spirit nor needeth he any Miracle to confirm it The End will both demonstrate the Act and also discover the Principle plainly enough But p. 14. Our Casuist riseth higher telling us That we have not only no certain Sign of any such Inspiration in the conceived Prayers of those which most pretend to it but many certain ones of the contrary Four he will instance in upon which he deseants p. 15 16 17 18 19 20. 1. The great Impertinence and Nonsense and Rudeness to say no worse that are sometimes mingled with these extempore Prayers 2. That they are so generally tinctured with the particular Opinions of those that offer them 3. That that which gives them the Reputation of being so inspired is not so much the Matter as the way and manner of expressing them 4. That that extraordinary manner and way of expressing them for which they are thought to be inspired doth apparently proceed from natural Causes The two latter be calleth Plain Signs Let us try the Certainty and Truth of any of them I observe his first Sign is wonderfully qualified with Sometimes which takes out all the Efficacy of it for I suppose our Casuist hath heard of such an Axiome as this Spiritus Dei non semper tangit Prophetatum c. The best Prophet is not always a true Prophet even Nathan himself falsly revealed the Will of God to David 2 Sam. 7.3 Go do all that is in thine heart for the Lord is with thee God sent him the next Morning to tell David the quite contrary And Paul who sometimes spake what he had received from the Lord 1 Cor. 11.23 and 1 Cor. 7.10 saith Vnto the married I command yet not I but the Lord v. 12. of that same Chapter saith But to the rest spake I not the Lord. So that with our Casuist's Leave supposing it true that at some time some Phrases may slip which some Criticks may call Nonsense and oft-times they will call that so which is not so or which should in their Judgment be rude and indecent or perhaps worse Supposing that some at some times should in their Prayers declare their own Opinions which are not Truth Neither of these would any more prove that these Mens Words in other Parts of their Prayers or at other Times in Prayer were not influenced by the Holy Spirit then David's Murther and Adultery Lot's Incest Peter's Denial of his Master would prove that they were not in the general Course of their Conversation led by the Spirit of God or that Nathan was never influenced in his Prophecy by the Holy Spirit because he was not when he approved of David's Resolution to build God an House So plain are the two first Signs that indeed they are no Signs nor have any colour of such a thing further than concerns